Feral Jundi

Thursday, October 28, 2010

Jobs: Close Protection Agent–NATO, OCONUS

Filed under: Afghanistan,Belgium,Jobs — Tags: , , , , , , , — Matt @ 1:03 PM

     Interesting job and definitely plan on some traveling with this one. I am sure they will favor those guys that are multi-lingual, but they did not specify as such. They will offer you a three year contract if you pass the shooting and fitness tests, and all of the other tests and checks.

     I am not the point of contact or recruiter for this job, and please follow the instructions below if you want to apply. Good luck and let me know how it goes if you apply. –Matt

NATO

Brussels, 12 October 2010

NOTIFICATION OF A “C” GRADE VACANCY NATO INTERNATIONAL STAFF

OPEN TO: NATIONALS OF NATO MEMBER STATES ONLY

STAFF VACANCY N°: C 08(2010) (several posts + reserve list)

LOCATION: NATO Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium

DIVISION: NATO OFFICE OF SECURITY

PROTECTIVE SECURITY BRANCH

CLOSE PROTECTION UNIT

TITLE: Close Protection Agent

GRADE:  C.3

WORKING HOURS: Day and night time shift work (working/non working days)

1. SUMMARY

The mission of the Close Protection Unit (CPU) is to protect the Secretary General at NATO Headquarters or any other assigned location, armed or otherwise, as circumstances dictate. Members of the team are expected to stand ready at all times to ensure a secure environment for the Secretary General. This includes ensuring the Secretary General’s physical protection against all forms of actual or potential threats and taking the appropriate steps to provide protection in a crisis or when working under pressure.

(more…)

Industry Talk: Russia Eyes Security Firms To Defend Assets Abroad

Filed under: Afghanistan,Industry Talk,Russia — Tags: , , , , , , , , — Matt @ 12:45 PM

     Amid the global economic crisis, the security guard industry remains a haven for those Russians not afraid of danger or boredom.

     The Russian private security business has seen a number of cuts and layoffs in the last year. However, the workforce still accounts for up to 750,000 guards, making it one of the biggest in the country.

     Aleksandr Mikhin, a spokesperson for a Moscow-based Alligator Security Company, which has been in business for 16 years, says companies have started reconsidering their contracts with security firms, trying to optimize their spending.

     But security is usually the last thing businesses are ready to sacrifice. And in an economy such as this, increased concern about crime, vandalism and terrorism is forecast to raise the need for security. 

     Adil Mukashev, an independent expert on terrorism issues based in Almaty, Kazakhstan, said the security firms will likely employ ex-military from Russia’s mainly Muslim North Caucasus region, where an Islamist insurgency is raging.

“This will kill two birds with one stone — give men work in a region with high unemployment and drive them away from radical Islam,” Mukashev told Reuters.

    An interesting little side fact is that I get a lot of readers from Russia checking out the blog. With over 750,000 guards in Russia, now I know why! lol But what is really interesting is the idea of exporting this pool of guards to protect Russian assets abroad. This is the territory I like to explore.

     The article only mentioned oil and mineral assets abroad, but there are other areas that would be of Russia’s best interest to take part in. Specifically, if they plan on allowing NATO to use their railways to transport weapons and whatnot. This will make railways a bigger target for terrorists, and increased traffic will increase exposure. Especially in Northern Afghanistan, because the Taliban and company will do all they can to attack that railway or to steal from it. For investors to trust these lines, there must be adequate security for them.

     Private security firms also allow Russia to participate in Afghanistan, and yet not appear to be involved militarily with it’s own troops. So if they want to help NATO and get some sweet deals in return (dealing with Georgia, etc.), as well as not get sucked in militarily into Afghanistan, they could easily assist via private military firms. Trainers for all types of things, like police or military, or even the pilots of all these Mi-17’s that Afghanistan is buying, could all be drawn from private firms.

     Add to that the legions of Afghan war veterans that Russia has who could be called upon for these contracts. That’s if Russian parliament says it’s cool? The money is what will be doing the talking here, as well as the security situation and unemployment realities of that country. All I know is NATO seems to be pretty interested in including Russia into the Afghan game.

    There is also the maritime security industry, and I am sure Russia would be eyeing ways to protect their shipping assets privately as well. These companies could also offer their services elsewhere, if legally allowed to do so by Russia.

     I am also interested in the other quote up top about using this as a means of employing out of work folks and keeping them away from Jihad? Would sending them to Iraq to defend a company like LUKOIL be a good thing or a bad thing for a muslim from the Northern Caucasus? –Matt

Russia eyes security firms to defend assets abroad

Russia to continue supplying Afghan army and police

Hold it right there

Russia eyes security firms to defend assets abroad

October 28, 2010

* Russia wants private security for assets in conflict zones

* Ex-military personnel could be from volatile N. Caucasus

By Amie Ferris-Rotman

Russia is preparing legislation to set up private security firms using ex-soldiers and police to protect its oil, gas and mineral holdings in conflict zones abroad, a lawmaker and ex-KGB officer said in an interview.

Up to 1,000 security personnel would operate along the lines of U.S. and British private security firms, said Gennady Gudkov, a deputy in Russia’s lower house of parliament, known as the Duma.

“It will be expensive but unfortunately it is very necessary,” said Gudkov, an influential member of the pro-Kremlin Fair Russia party and a former KGB officer who sits on parliament’s safety committee.

“As long as Russian firms are operating abroad, this is in the interest of the state,” he told Reuters, referring to Russia’s need to protect strategically important companies.

(more…)

Sunday, October 3, 2010

Logistics: NATO Convoy Security Threatened By Events In Pakistan And PSC Disbanding In Afghanistan

Filed under: Afghanistan,Logistics,Pakistan — Tags: , , , , , , , , — Matt @ 7:20 PM

     So now reality sets in.  Crybaby Karzai is now going to set up a state-run trucking protection system to take control of NATO convoy security?  Just one problem–they don’t have a clue on how to do it or where to get the manpower. Because if you take troops from essential war duties, and shuffle them around to fill those jobs that PSCs filled, then now we are negatively impacting strategies that depended on those troops.

     Also, who says that these Afghan soldiers won’t steal from the convoys or get into firefights with insurgents in local populations?  Because these forces will probably react the same way that Afghan PSC’s reacted doing the same job.  They will probably be worse, because they will have to do some serious OJT to catch up to the capability of PSC’s.

     My guess is that we will continue to see PSCs operate on the road to some degree, just because there is another issue here that trumps the politics of Crybaby Karzai.  NATO is highly dependent on these supplies coming in from Pakistan and elswhere, and if Karzai cannot quickly raise this 5,000 man trucking brigade, then I don’t see any other choice but to continue to rely on contractors.

     The other area to look at is the impact that events in Pakistan have on supplies being brought over those mountains.  NATO helicopters killed several Pakistani soldiers in a friendly fire accident during a cross border assault on a fleeing Taliban group, and that event has caused some serious secondary effects.  Specifically, it has caused an uproar in Pakistan and the government there has decided to shut down trucking as pay back. The insurgents are getting into the action as well, and ramping up attacks on these trucks.

    Which brings up the next point and story.  Supposedly, Pakistan is not protecting these trucks.  The trucking companies have been screaming for protection by the government, or the right to self protection with armed security, and the Pakistani government has done neither. Amazing.

     Now take a lack of security and put that together with the government’s blocking of trucks at the border, and you have an opportunity for the enemy. The insurgents are taking advantage of the riff between the US and Pakistan over this latest incident by attacking the symbols of the US–which is these trucks with fuel and supplies on them. These attacks make the insurgents look like the good guys so these attacks have twice the impact on the war effort. It wins over the support of the population, and it disrupts and destroys NATO logistics. –Matt

Afghan wrestles with protecting NATO supply routes

Little security for Nato supply convoys

——————————————————————-

NATO Suplies

Pakistani fire fighters try to extinguish burning NATO supply trucks carrying military vehicles and oil following militants attack on the outskirts of Islamabad on June 9, 2010.

Afghan wrestles with protecting NATO supply routes

October 3, 2010

By DION NISSENBAUM

Afghanistan’s top security officials are urging President Hamid Karzai to establish a military-run trucking system to take control of critical NATO supply routes now protected by a ragtag network of unsavory private security firms that is scheduled to be disbanded by year-end.

With the Karzai-imposed deadline looming to close the private convoy-protection companies, Afghanistan officials told McClatchy Newspapers on Sunday that they want to create a state-run military brigade equipped with its own trucks and thousands of soldiers to carry essential NATO supplies around the country.

(more…)

Wednesday, September 8, 2010

Afghanistan: The Future Of Training–More Money, More Demand For Trainers

Filed under: Afghanistan,Industry Talk,Training — Tags: , , , , , , , — Matt @ 1:04 AM

The United States expects to spend about $6 billion a year training and supporting Afghan troops and police after it begins withdrawing its own combat troops in 2011.

The estimates of U.S. spending through 2015, detailed in a NATO training mission document, are an acknowledgment that Afghanistan will remain largely dependent on the United States for its security.

That reality could become problematic for the Obama administration as it continues to seek money for Afghanistan from Congress in a time of increasingly tight budgets.

In Brussels, a NATO official said Monday that alliance commander Gen. David Petraeus had asked for 2,000 more soldiers, with nearly half to be trainers for the rapidly expanding Afghan security forces. The NATO official requested anonymity because he was not authorized to speak on the subject. 

*****

    A couple of things with these stories. Will Petraeus get these extra troops if NATO cannot scrape the bucket and get them on the scene?  Because politically and economically, sending more troops to Afghanistan is a hard sell in all the countries participating, and not just the US. How will this look during the coming elections in the US if more troops are asked for on top of the already thousands of troops requested for the surge?  Hell, some countries are backing out last minute (like the Dutch) and these actions always cause ripples in the planing and operations of the war effort.  So as I have said before, as NATO falters, contractors will be taking up the slack.

   I also continue to see plenty of training job ads, and according to the second article below, the money will be there for training in Afghanistan well into the future. The only thing though is politically, this administration and probably the next will continue to have problems with sending troops or getting congress to sign off on that training money.  As the troops get more limited in presence, and money becomes more scarce, contractors will continue to be an important tool to execute these training duties.

    The other thing I could see happening is more hybrid training programs popping up.  Where military folks mixed with contractors will be used to train the Afghans. We already see a little bit of this, and I think this combination works because the customer (US government) can ensure there is military oversight on these projects. It would also ensure that there is consistency in the training programs, and a metrics can be maintained by the military itself.

    All of this is just speculation, but given what is already on the ground, the military and contractor relationship will become even more important as time goes on. –Matt

NATO eyes 2,000 extra troops for Afghanistan: official

US expects to spend big in Afghanistan for years

—————————————————————–

NATO eyes 2,000 extra troops for Afghanistan: official

By Laurent Thomet

09/08/2010

US General David Petraeus, the commander of the war in Afghanistan, has requested 2,000 extra troops to bolster a crucial mission to train Afghan security forces, a NATO official said Monday.

The mission would come on the heels of the deployment of tens of thousands of soldiers who were sent as part of a surge strategy aimed at crushing a resilient Taliban insurgency, the official said.

“There is now a discussion under way for additional resources, principally trainers, that could be sent to Afghanistan to bolster the mission,” said the official, who requested anonymity.

At least 750 of the new soldiers would focus on training Afghan forces, he said, refusing to give more details about the rest of the mission. He said it was premature to say when the 2,000 extra troops would be deployed.

Getting Afghan security forces trained so they can take over security responsibilities is a paramount condition for the withdrawal of foreign troops from the nation, worn down by war.

(more…)

Friday, August 13, 2010

Industry Talk: NATO Slack Forces US To Send More Soldier And Contractor Trainers To Afghanistan

Filed under: Afghanistan,Industry Talk,Training — Tags: , , , , , , , , — Matt @ 10:36 PM

     This story is interesting for a couple of reasons.  Awhile back I wrote a post that dealt with this type of problem specifically, and how contractors are the ones who will be taking up the ‘slack’.  Matter of fact, that is part of the title of the post. Afghanistan: So As NATO Falters Or Members Leave, Will Contractors Pick Up The Slack?

     One thing that struck me was the numbers mentioned in this story about how many contractor trainers are over there now.  I think that number is much larger than the 2,000 that is mentioned.  I could be wrong, and I only say this because DoD really hasn’t been that accurate with their contractor accounting.  Still, 2,000 contractor trainers is pretty significant.

     The other part that I wanted to mention, was the idea that it takes NATO so long to spin up the required amount of manpower, and yet there was no mention on how fast it takes contractors to be spun up and sent over.  Of course NPR did not want to minimize the capability of the US military, but in all honesty, private industry is the winner for speed of deployment and quantity needed when it comes to training stuff.  Hell, the only thing that slows down contractor deployments, is the lack of government CORs needed to manage the whole contract to ensure it is properly carried out. lol But in this race, we excel.

     The three month training deployment that the 82nd Airborne finished was pretty cool too.  Three month deployments are nice, and private industry is the king of utilizing short deployment contracts like this.  Could we see the military do more of these types of deployments?  I know the troops would probably dig it.

     I also wanted to give a big thanks and pat on the back to all of those contractors out there who are a part of this massive training effort in the war.  You are an essential part of today’s strategy, and today’s war planners and strategists might not appreciate what you do, but I certainly appreciate the hard work you are doing.

     My guess is that there will be more work coming too, so definitely keep up an eye on all the forums and job boards if you are planning to get into the training side of the business. –Matt

——————————————————————

NATO Slack Forces U.S. To Send Afghanistan Trainers

by Tom Bowman

August 13, 2010

American soldiers — and even private contractors — are spearheading the effort to build an Afghan army and police force, so American and NATO troops can one day leave. But Pentagon officials and military officers say NATO nations still aren’t doing enough.

A few weeks ago, hundreds of artillery troops and air defense artillery soldiers from Fort Sill in Oklahoma and Fort Campbell in Kentucky started heading over to Afghanistan. They weren’t part of the so-called surge in combat troops. Instead, Defense Secretary Robert Gates signed orders for them to work as trainers because European nations were too slow in helping out.

“We’re still not getting NATO able to force-generate and deploy forces in the numbers that we need,” says Army Lt. Gen. William Caldwell, who leads the training effort in Afghanistan. “So Gates said, ‘OK then, I’m going to give you another unit.’ “

It was the second time this year Gates said OK to more American trainers because NATO wasn’t picking up the slack. An 800-soldier battalion from the 82nd Airborne Division just got back from Afghanistan on a three-month training mission, designed to serve as a “bridge” to more NATO troops.

But with the NATO troops still not arriving, the troops from Oklahoma and Kentucky were sent — for a year.

That’s annoying some members of Congress.

“NATO members who for whatever reason do not send additional combat troops or who intend to reduce their combat troop presence in the near future should at least be willing to provide trainers who operate away from the heavy fighting,” Sen. Carl Levin, a Michigan Democrat who heads the Armed Services Committee, said at a recent hearing.

NATO is willing — to a point. It has sent about 900 trainers to work with Afghan soldiers and police. The U.S. has sent more than twice that number. American private contractors have sent 2,000.

(more…)

« Newer Posts — Older Posts »

Powered by WordPress